High In Demand : Quality Review of MRI and CT reporting process

TeleradiologyHub Analysis wing has interviewed local clinicians and physicians in order to access the standards of reporting MRI or CT or Xray Images. "There is much downfall in reporting quality," due to increasing caseload, says Dr Jaysingh S, renowned cardiologist and general practitioner in Mumbai, adds "hence it is utmost important to identify problems in telereporting ". However before venturing into finding  solution on problems of CT and MI reporting process, one must define the problem accurately. To define the problem, TeleradiologyHub was adviced by BCG consultants using boundary analysis techniques in extracting the problem.

The Analysis Wing has therefore sought the interviews with stakeholders. They exercised ways to know the real problem in tereporting and cane along with two important hurdles in defining problem itself. To go back, TeleradiologyHub uses quite innovative patient engaging and handholding process right from booking his scan to interpretation of his reports.

 Primary Hurdle: Access to Clinical Data associated with CT or MRI

There is always a challenge to get an access to randomised 1000s of MRI or CT or Xray reports done by Radiologist at different diagnostic facilities. Added is  strict data privacy in healthcare, 

Owing to TeleradiologyHub team's considerate approach as detailed here - surely helped the serious telereporting service providers in getting rid of this hurdle. TelerafiologyHub team as we know , routinely books appointment slots for MRI or CT scans for patients. It talks to diagnostic facilities on behalf of patients and offers them discounts that saves almost $50 for patients. Later if there is any confusion regarding scanning protocol or contrast protocol, TeleradiologyHub team supports MRI or CT Technitian. Once report finalised and given by local radiologist at the diagnostic facility to patients, TeleradiologyHub team involves a senior radiologist (who are incentivised ) in interpreting the reports before he or she visits Specialist/ medical Consultant. For the patients, it's saving of money and anxiety, and free of cost consultation with the team and interpretation through the portal 24x7. This way, TeleradiologyHub is able to accumulate a good amount of patient data including reports and clinical papers from the patients. Keeping the patient identity intact, it is possible to segregate the data and analyze it in order to make quality interventions in impacting the radiology ecosystem.

Secondary Hurdle: Access to highly randomized MRI or CT Diacom 

It is really challenging to get access to high resolution Diacom Images and associated reports done by local radiologists or teleradiologists. Even if diagnostic facilities are afraid to share patient critical data, it is possible to make arguments on the falling standards of reporting. Based on final reports and clinical data gathered by TeleradiologyHub Analysis Wing, it interacts with patients, diagnostic facilities and clinicians, thereafter it is possible to throw some assumptions and check them, which is a daunting task of TeleradiologyHub Analysis wing. The output helps in checking the public policy Outcome or impacts the patient's health directly or indirectly.

MRI and CT Quality Conclusion:

To increase or set high quality standards of reporting specifically in teleradiology or second opinion seeking on CT or MRI report, there are strong biases. We must segregate biases from boundaries of the problem setting- which we can do by ensuring strong foundation of  assumption that could be verified with data, The boundaries are following hypothesis whch needs testing at all levels of reporting. These boundaries can be defined through hypothesis as follows

Hypothesis 1: On a large scale, the team found that 90% of the cases, MRI or CT reports are reported normal.
Hypothesis 2: Either for lack of Clinical papers, or not giving eyes to clinical study, critical MRI or CT studies are marked as Normal. These cases conceal the fate of reporting standards.
Hypothesis 3: MRI or CT Reports do not follow review mechanism in place owing to pressure of TAT
Hypothesis 4: MRI Review does not take into account patients or clinicians or third party radiologist review
Hypothesis 5: There is no clear incentive for Third Party Radiology review agencies to exist as diagnostic facilities find it unnecessary for extra cost associated.
Hypothesis 6: Quality comes with cost, a wrong view ecosystem is fed with

 TeleradiologyHub works on biases and boundary conditions

The high demand in the Quality Review of MRI and CT reporting process is absolutely justified as it deals with the health of the patient. TeleradiologyHub involves its analytic tools to structure the problem  and work on the hypothesis given above, The thinking radiologist minds set the solution to address this demand. Mostly such solutions can be directly fed to Healthcare Public Policy Analysis.